Let me get this straight, the 'geniuses' at Harvard actually conducted a study to find out that Republicans are more likely to appreciate 4th of July parades? These people are supposed to be smart, right? And, they needed a study to figure that out? By what stretch of whose imagination did anyone think otherwise?
When Barack Obama said that America is exceptional in the same sense that someone from another country finds their country exceptional (in other words, America is no more exceptional than any other country - i.e., not exceptional at all), he wasn't just speaking for himself; he was speaking right out of the liberal progressive bible. The vast majority of liberals believe that. And, if they see nothing truly exceptional about their country, what do they have to celebrate on the 4th of July? It's just an excuse to start a fire in the barbie and crack open a few beers - kind of like Christmas with outdoor cooking but without Santa Claus.
It's scary to think that Harvard is supposed to be the premier educational institution in our country. I used to have a coffee mug with a Gary Larson cartoon on it of a boy pushing on the door where the sign says "Pull" under another sign that says "School for the Gifted." Did Larson secretly mean Harvard? For my money, you don't need to look any further than the announcement of this study to recognize how deeply this country is in trouble.
FDR, bless his socialistic little soul, was right: "All we have to fear is fear itself." He was speaking to the power of positive thought.
If you want to start a business, if you want it to succeed, the first thing you have to do is envision it as a successful endeavor. Without that, there's little point in trying. Liberals, many of whom want America to fail so that we can join some wishful-thinking, socialistic/communistic utopian vision of a one-world order, have leveled many attacks against American values and culture. To some degree, that's part of the process of stripping away our vision of American Exceptionalism, which is essential to our success.
But, America is exceptional and far beyond the limited imagination of a minority of crackpots on the Left. America is exceptional, not because of a flawless and perfect past, but because the basic principles contained in our constitution provide the landscape where mankind has opportunity and hope.
What is opportunity? Opportunity is not a guarantee of success - it's the chance to succeed. You can't have a chance to succeed without a chance to fail. The good news, in America, is that, if you do fail, you get to try again.
Liberals think they're driving us toward a secular version of heaven on earth where John Lennon's vision of the world becomes a reality: "... no need to kill or die ... no need for greed or hunger ... And the world can live as one." Unfortunately, none of the liberals have bothered to ask themselves, "Then what?"
I am an aspiring entrepreneur. I have a vision of a successful business. What if someone could flip a switch and make my business all I could imagine it to be? What if a wealthy investor gives me so much money that my business can't fail? Well, I'd certainly take the money, but it's not going to fulfill the motivations that drove me to start my business in the first place.
In 1992, the liberals told George HW Bush, "It's the economy, stupid." Today, we could say the same thing to Obama, as well as, "It's employment, stupid." But, whether 1992, now or any other time in history, we can rightfully point out to liberals, socialists and communists: "It's the journey, stupid."
Liberals haven't stopped to consider that there is little or no value in life if everything is handed to us without any effort. When you lie in a hospital bed for too long, or watch too many "Is he the father?" episodes on Maury Povich, your muscles atrophy. If you don't need them or use them, they dry up and die. It's the same thing with life - if you don't live it, if you don't challenge it, it shrivels and dies.
That's why it's wrong to demonize those who have achieved the American dream. They validate the goal for those with the wisdom and courage to take up the challenge. I've said it before and I'll say it again, if Obama and the liberals ultimately achieve their vision for America, they're going to want to 'eliminate' me. And they might as well. Their vision for America is so unexceptional it offers nothing I want and I am entirely unwilling to live in it.
Of course, on the other hand, their efforts have given many of us, who enjoy 4th of July parades, more and more reasons to exercise our patriotic muscles. As for me, I'm going to a parade Monday to get a little conservative workout. I'm a little worried about those poor folks at Harvard, though. Here they are, at the 'greatest' mental fitness center and they come off like 97-pound weaklings who are kicking the sand in their own faces.
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Showing posts with label conservatives. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conservatives. Show all posts
Saturday, July 2, 2011
Friday, March 25, 2011
The Left is Right - we are racists
I've come to the conclusion that our attackers from the Left are right - we are racists. Of course, that's only by definition and, in this case, the Left's definition.
I've long said that I can't think of a single white-male Democrat who could count on my vote in a presidential race against Condaleeza Rice, who, in my eyes at least, is a black woman deserving of considerable respect. But, by the Left's definition, Ms. Rice isn't really black, just as she's not really a woman. She can't possibly fit into either of those categories if she hasn't accepted her role as the oppressed victim of white male dominance for which the last several millennium are ripe with examples.
That also explains why the Left-stream media and all them folks on the Left consider Barack Obama the first black president instead of another male president who happens to have black and white ancestry. Obama has successfully denied his white heritage and, if I understand correctly, in the book 'he' wrote about his struggles (his struggles? where have I heard that before? Hmmmm - sorry, I was drifting there) ... he even points to the time when he made a specific decision to 'choose' his black heritage and deny his white.
Of course, from the Left's perspective, Obama made the right choice. Rice, on the other hand, was almost assuredly led down the primrose path by fat-cat industrialists who wanted to take advantage of her outward appearance as a black female. For the most part, the same, of course, can be said of Sarah Palin.
It just aggravates the bujeebas out of liberal progressives when they see someone from their cast who doesn't recognize the oppressive nature of society. In a sense, for failing to recognize those obvious trials and tribulations, people like Palin and Rice deserve all the derision the Left can mount against them.
It's as if the Left is standing pool side in its Mickey Mouse swimwear shivering while Palin and Rice are standing in the water saying, "Come on in. The water is fine."
But, the water can't be fine. Just as the earth is facing impending doom from Global Warming, the pool of 'traditional' society is full of contaminated water. And, now, Palin and Rice have got it all over them.
I guess it's kind of like the old Uncle Tom perspective. The basis for that perspective, of course, is to recognize 'white male dominated society' as fatally flawed. I'm not going to stand here and tell you the 'traditional' society, to which I hold considerable allegiance, doesn't have flaws.
There are rumors that Benjamin Franklin had 82 illegitimate children. While some have argued the rumors are untrue, if they were, Franklin's political career would have ended in about midstream when someone noticed he spent a little too much time with the ladies in the courts of France. But, true or false, the ultimate truth is that Franklin was one of America's greatest individuals, regardless of race, creed or color, and, in spite of any flaws, he was definitely a keeper.
I see both sides of our society - the good and the bad. I admire people like Rice and Palin because, it seems to me, they also see both sides and yet, like me, they recognize that, all things considered, our society is overwhelmingly weighted to the positive side of the scale.
Many on the Left want to abandon our Constitutional government. They want to tear down the edifice of free-market capitalism. My thought is we've got a darn good house here with a strong foundation. There are some things that need a little work but that doesn't suggest it's a good idea to burn the structure to the ground and dig up the foundation walls to build a new structure. That's particularly true when the new structure the Left is suggesting has proven to contain significant structural weaknesses.
So, I don't care if I'm a racist by the Left's definition. In the first case, I don't have a whole lot of respect for the Left's opinion to begin with. In the second case, if the reasons for the respect I have for Rice and Palin are related at all to color or gender it's only in that they have had the courage and foresight not to follow the herd.
I've long said that I can't think of a single white-male Democrat who could count on my vote in a presidential race against Condaleeza Rice, who, in my eyes at least, is a black woman deserving of considerable respect. But, by the Left's definition, Ms. Rice isn't really black, just as she's not really a woman. She can't possibly fit into either of those categories if she hasn't accepted her role as the oppressed victim of white male dominance for which the last several millennium are ripe with examples.
That also explains why the Left-stream media and all them folks on the Left consider Barack Obama the first black president instead of another male president who happens to have black and white ancestry. Obama has successfully denied his white heritage and, if I understand correctly, in the book 'he' wrote about his struggles (his struggles? where have I heard that before? Hmmmm - sorry, I was drifting there) ... he even points to the time when he made a specific decision to 'choose' his black heritage and deny his white.
Of course, from the Left's perspective, Obama made the right choice. Rice, on the other hand, was almost assuredly led down the primrose path by fat-cat industrialists who wanted to take advantage of her outward appearance as a black female. For the most part, the same, of course, can be said of Sarah Palin.
It just aggravates the bujeebas out of liberal progressives when they see someone from their cast who doesn't recognize the oppressive nature of society. In a sense, for failing to recognize those obvious trials and tribulations, people like Palin and Rice deserve all the derision the Left can mount against them.
It's as if the Left is standing pool side in its Mickey Mouse swimwear shivering while Palin and Rice are standing in the water saying, "Come on in. The water is fine."
But, the water can't be fine. Just as the earth is facing impending doom from Global Warming, the pool of 'traditional' society is full of contaminated water. And, now, Palin and Rice have got it all over them.
I guess it's kind of like the old Uncle Tom perspective. The basis for that perspective, of course, is to recognize 'white male dominated society' as fatally flawed. I'm not going to stand here and tell you the 'traditional' society, to which I hold considerable allegiance, doesn't have flaws.
There are rumors that Benjamin Franklin had 82 illegitimate children. While some have argued the rumors are untrue, if they were, Franklin's political career would have ended in about midstream when someone noticed he spent a little too much time with the ladies in the courts of France. But, true or false, the ultimate truth is that Franklin was one of America's greatest individuals, regardless of race, creed or color, and, in spite of any flaws, he was definitely a keeper.
I see both sides of our society - the good and the bad. I admire people like Rice and Palin because, it seems to me, they also see both sides and yet, like me, they recognize that, all things considered, our society is overwhelmingly weighted to the positive side of the scale.
Many on the Left want to abandon our Constitutional government. They want to tear down the edifice of free-market capitalism. My thought is we've got a darn good house here with a strong foundation. There are some things that need a little work but that doesn't suggest it's a good idea to burn the structure to the ground and dig up the foundation walls to build a new structure. That's particularly true when the new structure the Left is suggesting has proven to contain significant structural weaknesses.
So, I don't care if I'm a racist by the Left's definition. In the first case, I don't have a whole lot of respect for the Left's opinion to begin with. In the second case, if the reasons for the respect I have for Rice and Palin are related at all to color or gender it's only in that they have had the courage and foresight not to follow the herd.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Silly rabbit, tricks are for liberals - and SEIU affiliated Wisconsin judges
My friend just sent an e-mail suggesting that the Wisconsin judge who placed a temporary halt on the recent and contentious labor law passed in Wisconsin has a son who is connected with SEIU and, therefore, by rights, the judge should have recused herself from the case.
Of course, where my friend is concerned, it's easier to point out the flaws in another's thinking than to recognize them in our own. Still, we should continue to point out these flaws in the hopes that our friends will do the same for us someday.
Any how, back to the judge from Wisconsin; just because her son may wear SEIU-purple footie pajamas to bed at night, doesn't mean the judge would allow that affiliation to soil her reputation ... I mean, to influence her decision. And, the fact that her son, apparently, grew up with an attitude that fits so well with an ultra-Left-wing organization like that doesn't mean Mom had anything to do with the development of her son's perspective. Look at Ronald Reagan and his son Ronny? Maybe Mom's a devout conservative and her son is still rebelling against common sense.
Of course, Mom's decision from the bench does appear devoid of the same kind of logic. And, maybe she is a liberal, as well. Maybe that's where her son got it all, like picking up a virus from someone who spent too much time cleaning the dog pen without the help of a pooper scooper. That doesn't mean she should recuse herself.
And here is where logic failed my friend. He forgot that the world operates under two distinct rules of nature - one for conservatives and a completely different set of rules for liberals.
The problem is intrinsic to the core values of the two groups. Conservatives have chosen a narrower path in life. They believe that, just because you can do something doesn't necessarily mean you should. For instance, just because a person has the ability to put something putrid in their mouth doesn't mean they should. Or, for another example, just because we can elect a black man president doesn't mean we should elect the first one with superior teleprompter skills.
Liberals, on the other hand, aspire to a lower set of standards. Sexual shenanigans, while generally devastating for the careers of conservative politicians, are accepted among the liberal herd as nothing more than an expression of creativity. I mean, only a liberal would try to passionately argue that oral sex is not sex.
And so, in terms of conflict of interests, from the liberal perspective, this is called acute justice. Which makes sense, after all. It's acute because it's in touch with their inner feelings. To heck with legal precedents, does the decision give you a warm fuzzy, that's the question. The application of liberal justice does tend to leave a bit of a putrid taste in ones mouth but, after a while, their breed seems to have gotten used to the flavor.
Of course, where my friend is concerned, it's easier to point out the flaws in another's thinking than to recognize them in our own. Still, we should continue to point out these flaws in the hopes that our friends will do the same for us someday.
Any how, back to the judge from Wisconsin; just because her son may wear SEIU-purple footie pajamas to bed at night, doesn't mean the judge would allow that affiliation to soil her reputation ... I mean, to influence her decision. And, the fact that her son, apparently, grew up with an attitude that fits so well with an ultra-Left-wing organization like that doesn't mean Mom had anything to do with the development of her son's perspective. Look at Ronald Reagan and his son Ronny? Maybe Mom's a devout conservative and her son is still rebelling against common sense.
Of course, Mom's decision from the bench does appear devoid of the same kind of logic. And, maybe she is a liberal, as well. Maybe that's where her son got it all, like picking up a virus from someone who spent too much time cleaning the dog pen without the help of a pooper scooper. That doesn't mean she should recuse herself.
And here is where logic failed my friend. He forgot that the world operates under two distinct rules of nature - one for conservatives and a completely different set of rules for liberals.
The problem is intrinsic to the core values of the two groups. Conservatives have chosen a narrower path in life. They believe that, just because you can do something doesn't necessarily mean you should. For instance, just because a person has the ability to put something putrid in their mouth doesn't mean they should. Or, for another example, just because we can elect a black man president doesn't mean we should elect the first one with superior teleprompter skills.
Liberals, on the other hand, aspire to a lower set of standards. Sexual shenanigans, while generally devastating for the careers of conservative politicians, are accepted among the liberal herd as nothing more than an expression of creativity. I mean, only a liberal would try to passionately argue that oral sex is not sex.
And so, in terms of conflict of interests, from the liberal perspective, this is called acute justice. Which makes sense, after all. It's acute because it's in touch with their inner feelings. To heck with legal precedents, does the decision give you a warm fuzzy, that's the question. The application of liberal justice does tend to leave a bit of a putrid taste in ones mouth but, after a while, their breed seems to have gotten used to the flavor.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
The difference between liberal progressives and conservatives
There are a lot of differences between liberal progressives and conservatives. For instance, liberal progressives look back at America's history with a happy feeling of shame. Conservatives look back at America's history with reverence for the incredible accomplishments of Americans who came before us, a sense that there are lessons to be learned from the past, including the mistakes of the past, but, most importantly, with a just and reasonable sense of pride.
Liberal progressives look at the problems in the world and irrationally blame the U.S. for all of these. Conservatives look at the problems in the world and, while seeing room for improvement, recognize the significant contributions of the United States to world peace, the reduction in hunger, the recovery from disaster, and, beyond the contribution of any other, the advancement of individual and national freedoms.
Liberal progressives look at government as the solution to problems at home and abroad. Though the government rarely truly improves a situation where it meddles, Liberal Progressives fit the model of insanity by striving to employ the same types of big-government actions while expecting different results. Conservatives have seen that socialism, welfarianism, and big government fail to solve virtually any problems and always, always erode the basic freedoms of individuals. Their mantra is limited government and, true conservatives follow this pattern religiously for one simple reason - it works.
In another stroke or perspective on insanity, liberal progressives identify the government as America, heap all the world's guilt at its feet and then invite it into our personal lives as though, with the blessing of liberal progressives, government will suddenly change its stripes. Conservatives identify the people - the individuals - with a fervent sense of freedom and liberty, as America and the government as a necessary evil best taken in small doses and the smaller the better.
Liberal progressives see nation states as outmoded and fatally flawed models for society regardless of the despots and violent radicals who cover the earth. Conservatives, while recognizing that it is not workable to force other countries to adopt our system of government, realize the idiocy of abandoning a system the works for a pipe dream based on principles already proven unworkable. If other countries are jealous of our success, they're welcome to join us in a system of government that respects the individual, as well as the individual's right to strive for success, which is only possible if the individual also has a chance of failure. The beauty of this system is that, should someone fail, they have the right to try again ... and again ... and again ... and again ...
Liberal progressives see 'the end of the world' around every corner. Conservatives realize that this big, blue marble is not going to explode and vanish into space dust any time soon. They recognize the limits on the influence of man on nature. While agreeing that we share a responsibility as stewards of the planet, conservatives humbly admit that, while temperatures ebb and flow, disasters come and go, mankind is only one small part of that equation.
Liberal progressives see their elitist intelligence as the ultimate 'wisdom' in the world, therefore justifying their leadership. Conservatives recognize the limitations of man's capacity for understanding, place their ultimate faith in a higher power and realize that the greatest failings of man center on instances when mankind arrogantly overestimates his level of intellectual brilliance.
If it appears that I could go on and on, that's probably because I could. But, to wrap things up, please consider the following differences between liberal progressives and conservatives. The prior, when caught in an unseemly situation, such as a politician caught with his pants down, laughs it off and goes on as though nothing happened because they can't be held accountable for ethics they never aspired to. The latter, justly goes through the political wringer because he failed to live up to the ethics he claimed and generally watches his political career rightly crumble.
The other big difference is that, in the eyes of our Left-stream media, all violence originates with conservatives, even when reality flies in the face of that assertion. Unsubstantiated threats of violence against liberal progressives are touted by the media as continued examples of radicalism from the right while actual threats against those on the right, such as union threats against Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, are all but ignored.
Liberal progressives look at the problems in the world and irrationally blame the U.S. for all of these. Conservatives look at the problems in the world and, while seeing room for improvement, recognize the significant contributions of the United States to world peace, the reduction in hunger, the recovery from disaster, and, beyond the contribution of any other, the advancement of individual and national freedoms.
Liberal progressives look at government as the solution to problems at home and abroad. Though the government rarely truly improves a situation where it meddles, Liberal Progressives fit the model of insanity by striving to employ the same types of big-government actions while expecting different results. Conservatives have seen that socialism, welfarianism, and big government fail to solve virtually any problems and always, always erode the basic freedoms of individuals. Their mantra is limited government and, true conservatives follow this pattern religiously for one simple reason - it works.
In another stroke or perspective on insanity, liberal progressives identify the government as America, heap all the world's guilt at its feet and then invite it into our personal lives as though, with the blessing of liberal progressives, government will suddenly change its stripes. Conservatives identify the people - the individuals - with a fervent sense of freedom and liberty, as America and the government as a necessary evil best taken in small doses and the smaller the better.
Liberal progressives see nation states as outmoded and fatally flawed models for society regardless of the despots and violent radicals who cover the earth. Conservatives, while recognizing that it is not workable to force other countries to adopt our system of government, realize the idiocy of abandoning a system the works for a pipe dream based on principles already proven unworkable. If other countries are jealous of our success, they're welcome to join us in a system of government that respects the individual, as well as the individual's right to strive for success, which is only possible if the individual also has a chance of failure. The beauty of this system is that, should someone fail, they have the right to try again ... and again ... and again ... and again ...
Liberal progressives see 'the end of the world' around every corner. Conservatives realize that this big, blue marble is not going to explode and vanish into space dust any time soon. They recognize the limits on the influence of man on nature. While agreeing that we share a responsibility as stewards of the planet, conservatives humbly admit that, while temperatures ebb and flow, disasters come and go, mankind is only one small part of that equation.
Liberal progressives see their elitist intelligence as the ultimate 'wisdom' in the world, therefore justifying their leadership. Conservatives recognize the limitations of man's capacity for understanding, place their ultimate faith in a higher power and realize that the greatest failings of man center on instances when mankind arrogantly overestimates his level of intellectual brilliance.
If it appears that I could go on and on, that's probably because I could. But, to wrap things up, please consider the following differences between liberal progressives and conservatives. The prior, when caught in an unseemly situation, such as a politician caught with his pants down, laughs it off and goes on as though nothing happened because they can't be held accountable for ethics they never aspired to. The latter, justly goes through the political wringer because he failed to live up to the ethics he claimed and generally watches his political career rightly crumble.
The other big difference is that, in the eyes of our Left-stream media, all violence originates with conservatives, even when reality flies in the face of that assertion. Unsubstantiated threats of violence against liberal progressives are touted by the media as continued examples of radicalism from the right while actual threats against those on the right, such as union threats against Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, are all but ignored.
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
NPR exec claims intelligence while exhibiting none
It really didn't bother me when I was taking a class at Northern Illinois University and the professor suggested that, "One day, computer programmers may be able to take all of your brainwaves and create a program of your mind and thoughts so that you would live inside the Internet." Flaky? Sure. A little bit moronic? Absolutely. Does that kind of thinking have a place in the 'real world?' Come on? But, at least he didn't ask me to watch a performance of two people having sex or something.
On the other hand, I was bothered today when I saw the video of NPR executives Ron Schiller and Betsy Liley speaking to what they thought were two men with $5 million to give from the Muslim Brotherhood in America.
There was a lot said by these two NPR geniuses that bothered me, like the laughable statement that TEA Party people are fanatically involved in people's lives, but there was one other thing that prompted me to write here today. I was bothered by their comments that fit with the knuckle-dragging Neanderthal brush the Left has consistently tried to use to paint conservatives and, in particular, members of the TEA Party.
Schiller spoke of how 'his' country has disturbed and disappointed him. He said that the "educated, so-called elite is too small a percentage of the population (but, apparently, a couple members smaller than he was counting)."
He added that "you have this very large uneducated" group that is more "about anti-intellectualism."
I used to talk to people about how the things they taught in college didn't exactly fit well in the real world - like making a computer program out of your brainwaves. But, it really goes much deeper than that. Many of the ideas better left in academia are not as obviously idiotic as abandoning our bodies to exist as programs in the Internet.
If you want an example of what happens when someone takes naively wild ideas out of the classroom and tries them out in the real world, you need look no further than the White House. Barack Obama is the epitome of someone better placed in the figurative world of ideas than operating where the rubber meets the road. It's like giving the keys to someone who once read a book about driving a car instead of someone who has actually been down the road a time or two.
Above all, what Schiller exhibited is the kind of arrogance I love about 'the elite' - it makes them such easy targets. And, in the process, it reminds us 'little people' that all those letters beyond their names don't necessarily make them any wiser than the rest of us.
I don't have a Phd after my name. I do have a dozen credits towards a masters degree, however. During the time I've spent in academia, I've met some very intelligent people. Some of them have less common sense than a lab rat but they can still provide the solutions to complex mathematical equations.
We have a need, in the real world, for people who can solve such problems. However, when I checkout of the grocery store, in spite of the rise in food prices, I still don't need a scientific calculator to do the math. We also have a need in this world for intellectuals, people who will explore and consider those things we don't otherwise have time to consider. But, thankfully, engineers building aircraft for Boeing don't apply theoretical equations to the process. They like to test out the theoretical before launching airplanes filled with hundreds of living, breathing, non-theoretical bodies.
The truth is, after numerous years in academia, where I've met some very intelligent people, I can honestly say that, some of the smartest people I've ever met never went to college. Some of them never even finished high school. I had a friend who couldn't read or write but could do things with a tool-and-die machine that were out of this world.
One of the most important things I've learned about intelligence is that it's value is dramatically diminished when accompanied by arrogance. Arrogance, after all, is the exhibition of absolute confidence that one is correct. Once we reach that point, there's no reason to search any further for answers. And if Schiller is disturbed and disappointed, I suggest that he look within first before casting stones where he obviously hasn't really looked.
On the other hand, I was bothered today when I saw the video of NPR executives Ron Schiller and Betsy Liley speaking to what they thought were two men with $5 million to give from the Muslim Brotherhood in America.
There was a lot said by these two NPR geniuses that bothered me, like the laughable statement that TEA Party people are fanatically involved in people's lives, but there was one other thing that prompted me to write here today. I was bothered by their comments that fit with the knuckle-dragging Neanderthal brush the Left has consistently tried to use to paint conservatives and, in particular, members of the TEA Party.
Schiller spoke of how 'his' country has disturbed and disappointed him. He said that the "educated, so-called elite is too small a percentage of the population (but, apparently, a couple members smaller than he was counting)."
He added that "you have this very large uneducated" group that is more "about anti-intellectualism."
I used to talk to people about how the things they taught in college didn't exactly fit well in the real world - like making a computer program out of your brainwaves. But, it really goes much deeper than that. Many of the ideas better left in academia are not as obviously idiotic as abandoning our bodies to exist as programs in the Internet.
If you want an example of what happens when someone takes naively wild ideas out of the classroom and tries them out in the real world, you need look no further than the White House. Barack Obama is the epitome of someone better placed in the figurative world of ideas than operating where the rubber meets the road. It's like giving the keys to someone who once read a book about driving a car instead of someone who has actually been down the road a time or two.
Above all, what Schiller exhibited is the kind of arrogance I love about 'the elite' - it makes them such easy targets. And, in the process, it reminds us 'little people' that all those letters beyond their names don't necessarily make them any wiser than the rest of us.
I don't have a Phd after my name. I do have a dozen credits towards a masters degree, however. During the time I've spent in academia, I've met some very intelligent people. Some of them have less common sense than a lab rat but they can still provide the solutions to complex mathematical equations.
We have a need, in the real world, for people who can solve such problems. However, when I checkout of the grocery store, in spite of the rise in food prices, I still don't need a scientific calculator to do the math. We also have a need in this world for intellectuals, people who will explore and consider those things we don't otherwise have time to consider. But, thankfully, engineers building aircraft for Boeing don't apply theoretical equations to the process. They like to test out the theoretical before launching airplanes filled with hundreds of living, breathing, non-theoretical bodies.
The truth is, after numerous years in academia, where I've met some very intelligent people, I can honestly say that, some of the smartest people I've ever met never went to college. Some of them never even finished high school. I had a friend who couldn't read or write but could do things with a tool-and-die machine that were out of this world.
One of the most important things I've learned about intelligence is that it's value is dramatically diminished when accompanied by arrogance. Arrogance, after all, is the exhibition of absolute confidence that one is correct. Once we reach that point, there's no reason to search any further for answers. And if Schiller is disturbed and disappointed, I suggest that he look within first before casting stones where he obviously hasn't really looked.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)